Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

[LibertyHallVols]

A recent thread on a new movie was recently posted, the plot of which pokes fun at the reenacting hobby(ies). We can blame it on Hollyweird. We can blame it on farbs.

But, I'm wondering if should we be blaming ourselves.

Question 1:
Do "we" (as in "Us", not "Them" or all of us-n-them together) do enough interpretation for the public?
(Quantity, regardless of quality)

Question 2:
Are we doing things that are new, different, and/or interesting in our efforts to interpret for the public? Not "new/different/interesting" from OUR point of view, but from the point of view of THE PUBLIC. When we manage to get an audience, are we holding their interest?
(Quality, not quantity)

Question 3:
What are some new and innovative ideas for interpretation? Anybody doing something new/different this year? Anybody have an idea in your head for something new, but you've never had the chance to try it at an event?

I may be all-wet... but my premise is that blaming "Hollywood", "Hollywierd", "The Media", or anyone else is a cop out and we are just bellyaching.

Things are funny when they ring-true. If the public finds it funny, then could it be true. Could we work harder to provide a counter-point to the unspoken argument in many of these films that we are all just overgrown children and racist baffoons?

(In the words of Mike Myers as "Linda Richmond") Discuss.
I'm curious about folks take on questions 1 and 2. And, I'm curious what we can come up with on Question 3. I don't mean this to beat anyone down. Rather, if films like this are going to drive introspection, I'd like to see healthy introspection and something good come out of it.

[Emmanuel Dabney]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

A good, thought-provoking thread as we are now in the 150th cycles ("What?!" say you military folks? "There's no Civil War 150th til 2011!" Forget not the 1859 events, the 1860 election and sadly except for some efforts on the part of the NPS we missed the vital 2007 150th of the Dred Scott decision)...

I'm guessing Pat Lewis, Chris Young, and/or Lee White may jump on here following my comments but I will say what I've said before I do think the 145th Chickamauga LH in Sept. 2008 organized by Pat Lewis &c. really engaged the public. I was surprised that so many visitors knew Sam Watkins' Co. Aytch and I think everyone on the section of the field did a good job in both upholding and challenging the public's connotations of the real experiences of Co. H, 1st TN, the 1st TN in general, and the challenge of memory. One of the instrumental ways that was done was through my participation as a body servant and addressing the audience. In general in that case, the public was engaged because Watkins selected to leave this experience out.

That may start the ball rolling...

[Union Navy]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

1. As Navy, that is most of what we do, even for other reenactors (living historians). I always encourage questions from passers-by and their children. I also have a lot of props, since I can't bring a gunboat. Getting a few folks started with questions usually attracts others. While at Shiloh, our crew talked to over 6000 visitors without ever leaving our tent fly. It helps that most civil war enthusiasts still know nothing about the navy, so "what they already know" doesn't interfere with "new things to learn."

2. Once again, as Navy, most folks see what we are doing as new and different anyways.

3. If we're going to call ourselves interpreters, maybe we should apply interpretive practices and theories to our interactions with visitors. We should have a few (3 to 5) main points we will want to get across in our interactions, and lead our conversations that way. Not too many. We should drum on those and present our premise in various ways, but keep coming back to those important elements. That will require planning ahead and not getting sidetracked too far by our visitors. People just might actually learn something and RETAIN it. If we are in character, even "wrong" themes can be used, to more accurately portray period mindsets.

I may be preaching to the choir, but less "camping in costume" and more "memorializing the great sacrifices" could only help. Living history is serious business...

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

Hallo!

IMHO...

Question 1:
Do "we" (as in "Us", not "Them" or all of us-n-them together) do enough interpretation for the public?
(Quantity, regardless of quality)

No, by default. See No. 2

Question 2:
Are we doing things that are new, different, and/or interesting in our efforts to interpret for the public? Not "new/different/interesting" from OUR point of view, but from the point of view of THE PUBLIC. When we manage to get an audience, are we holding their interest?
(Quality, not quantity)

No, we do not.

I spent last week in Colonial Williamsburg.
The "Colonial Williamburg" of my youth consisted of static displays (furnished houses and buildings) "guarded" by a blue haired or white hair senior citizen in a really bad costume offering a mix of Third Person narration followed by "If you have any questions? No?"

After some decades had passed, I experienced a new model (in some of the buildings) that is not First Person or Third Person but rather scenarios and situtaions of daily life where more historically costumed docents, interpretors, and even an actor or three, with identities went about a combination of daily life, engagement, interaction, interpretation, and demonstration.

For a cynical, jaded, burned out, curmudgeon like me.. it was IMHO
actually very "cutting edge" and interesting (me acting as a tourist, as well as usually a "reenactor").
I was pleasantly surprised.

When I think to the ACW, I pessimistically see the Samo-Samo of spectators walking through camps or watching a "battle" from a distance. And as such, I see "us" (when it concerns a public other than ourselves for ourselves) frozen in time about 1976.

Others' mileage will vary...

Curt

[DocReynolds]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

Well...I can't speak fer other fellers...but overall the hobby does need more folks willing to actively interpret...I know my gang of cutthroats, coffee-boilers and reprobates do a good deal of interpretation for the public...Its what we do when we're at living hsitories...

We don't hide...move into the woods, skulk, stare or turn our backs when peole come into camp...(which I've observed some in our hobby doing..)

We put energy into it, we know our facts, and we don't shy away from topics...If the visitors bring things up, we address them...It seems to work....(the third person stuff that is...)

As for things that are closer to first person, we work on it, but its a tougher nut to crack as you need to A) have an audience that understands what you are doing and B) you need to be well prepared.

As for the "Hollyweird stuff"...sterotypes come from somewhere...nuf said on that

Things that have worked for us:

Intersperse short scenarios into a living history. No marathon court martial our three hour pay scenario...It may not be perfect first person, but prep the audience, and run 15-20 minutes.

Music: We are not the Moromon Tabernacle Choir...we know it, we warn the public, and we provide a selection of things...we choose carefully and don;t change any lyrics for those we sing... (yes, there are some we keep for the campfire, and not the public...)
It has been surprisingly successful [considering the vocal quality]...

Be flexible we have a large background volume of material, and "go with the flow" of visitors.

Cook with the Public around us OK so it ain't Emeril, but cooking and talking has gotten lots of interaction with the public...

I know, I'm preachin' to the choir...but them's me 2 cents...


Pete Bedrossian
150th NY/3rd NCT

[briangauthier]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

I agree with Curt. When I started this hobby, it was at the behest of some friends who thought I might like to become more involved with history. My presuppositions were of tired old men sitting around a campfire and every once in a blue moon taking pot-shots at the "rebs" across the proverbial street.

Once I started doing more "authentic" events, my mindset changed. Only slightly. So often I have gone to an event where there are no spectators, only to be disappointed that no one could see what we were doing. For the public to truly get a glimpse at the life of a Civil War soldier, or rather, as close as we can safely portray, they would have to load up a pack, don their hiking shoes, and journey out with us. We do it, so why can't we expect some others to do it as well? Maybe I'm missing the mark, but IMHO people are tired of camps full of old fat men who dress in dandy uniforms for a few days and know nothing of the men who fought and died to keep our country from dissolving(or from the northern aggressor). Can we encourage people to do this, come out with us I mean? Is there any way to portray a campaigner lifestyle at a non-campaign event?

At Bummers, we bitched, moaned, complained about rations, joked, and cursed our superiors, JUST LIKE REAL SOLDIERS DO! I kept thinking, "If only spectators could see us now, they might actually appreciate what we do instead of make fun of us". Again, I may be completely off the mark, but, like in the classroom, we need to be cognizant of what the public's actual preconceptions are. Most of us haven't been on the "other side" now for a while and maybe we've lost touch with what others actually see at events. I, for one, will probably fail at heeding my own advice. Oh well. I try.

Most Sincerely,

[btfire]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

Many groups go to and participate in small living histories which provide a tremendous avenue for a peek into 19th century lives. Many of the military reenactor/historical interpreters are far behind in their understanding of life when compared to the civilian participants. This hurts many and prevents them from advancing in the living history aspect of this "hobby." The EFUBU that take us into the woods is truly fun for us, but it lacks in the ability to let people see the small taste or reality we are able to create. The most common CW recreation people visit are the commercial battlefield recreations put on around our country with varying degrees, or lack there of, of authenticity. It is unfortunate that the people who come into the most contact with spectators do not provide a quality environment for them to learn.

Small living histories that focus on a specific time and place are where we may provide quality interpretation to the masses. This means getting involved with the park and finding out what THEY want. We cannot go into a site and tell a ranger what WE want: it is both rude and generally unacceptable. There are many sites worthy of preservation and interpretation that require a simple phone call or professional letter. The key is offering the service and finding out what their requirements are. In January 2011 there will be an event unlike any I have participated in that will recreate a slice of military and civilian roles in the days before the war. This event will take place in two locations and involve movements of soldiers across water at night. The days will be filled with visitors to both sites and the nights will be for us. Our ability to interpret history (which involves no sugar coating, i.e. the good/bad/ugly) will be put to the test by visitors from many backgrounds and hometowns. This event will not feature a battlefield recreation nor a hot dog stand. Simple history put on by knowledgeable people who care about informing the public.

[JimKindred]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

I may be all-wet... but my premise is that blaming "Hollywood", "Hollywierd", "The Media", or anyone else is a cop out and we are just bellyaching.

John,

I don't blame Hollywood or the media. Just look at who normally makes up the crew of reenactors rushing to be on camera and you will have your answer.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

Hallo!

We teach people how to treat us.

IMHO, our seemingly cast in concrete model for "public interaction" was set in 3rd Person impressions about 1976, and in 1st Person impressions in 1986.

While there are few and rare exceptions to both, as well as shakers-and-movers, as exceptions who do brilliant work in interpreting to one another as well as the Public- they are the exception to the mainstream (lower case "m" use noted) rule.

IMHO, and and as one of the "ring leaders" in the pre Glowing Screen daze of the issue and boycott with "The Killer Angels" bka "Gettysburg..." we seem to have sealed our "fate" and relationship with Hollywood at a key juncture in time.
What Hollywoord art and set director Randy Wilkins warned "us" then would happen, did happen. Meaning, some of community sold themselves very cheaply, and as a result the very best and historically faithful living historians are NUG NOT the ones we seen in TV or Hollywood productions.
And what we do see on the screen, is all too often farce and comedy at our expense- while what the Public expects to see at "events" is just walk through a tent city camp (regardless of the historical time, place, or circumstance) on the way to "the battle."

Curt
Heretic Mess

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

I'm glad to see some action on this thread!

Emmanuel:
Yes, your role in the Co. H scenario was truly innovative! One day, I hope our paths will cross!

Folks:
I had a couple of purposes with this thread:
1) I hate the victim mentality. My life is the result of my choices, not someone's opinion of me or anything that was "done to me." If we're in the hobby "just for us", then we have to accept whatever opinion the public has. If we don't like the negative public opinion, it is up to us to do something about it.

2) I wanted to get the creative juices flowing. "We" have been doing events for "Us" for the better part of a decade now. What have we learned? Isn't there SOMETHING we could share with the public that might be new/different/interesting, outside of the samo-samo circa 1976 to 1986 ideas?

How many events entail some sort of picket duty these days? I'd guess at least half. Imagine setting up a "textbook" reserve/outpost/sentries and explaining to the public how a Civil War army guarded itself from "the enemy".
- Explain the theory of how it worked.
- Show rotations in-action.
- Explain countersigns and paroles.
- Explain the use of the ground, the "layers" of barriers between the sentries and the main body of the army.
- Talk about the tedium and the terror of the duty.

Condense it to just a few key learning points that are easily digested and let the action and interaction set those learning points into the spectators' memories.

"We" have compiled a wealth of knowledge that is outside the norm of what people see at the run-o-the-mill event that could be used creatively to engage the public. Why not tap into that knowledge?

Whatcha got, folks?

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

Small living histories that focus on a specific time and place are where we may provide quality interpretation to the masses. This means getting involved with the park and finding out what THEY want. We cannot go into a site and tell a ranger what WE want: it is both rude and generally unacceptable.

Brian,

You have many good points, but I wanted to acknowledge the point above. I agree completely. I would add to this:
When we go to events, even EFUBU's, we are "about the event" and should help the host/organizer/park/whomever achieve their vision, not simply our personal vision. Where my wants don't jive with the event's goals, the event must win or everyone loses.

[Jim of The SRR]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

Question 3: [/B]
What are some new and innovative ideas for interpretation? Anybody doing something new/different this year? Anybody have an idea in your head for something new, but you've never had the chance to try it at an event?

.

Struggles of Secession - Westville, AG 1863 will offer guided tours fro the public on two days. Although I think the prime motivation for reenactors to be there is for themselves, their recreated roles will provide for some great vignettes for the tour groups. These will be new and unique for much of the public as theyw ill get to see what life on the Homefront in a rural, working class town will be like in 1863. They won't see a battle and they won't see women in farby ball dresses swishing around like Scarlett O'hara (a myth that the public believes to be true of the South and is perpetuated by the legacy of Margaret Mitchell).

Regards,
Jim Butler

[LWhite64]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

Ok, As Em said, one of us was bound to get on this, and I hope Pat will add his thoughts as well. But, no, we dont do enough, and more importantly, and once again Im speaking in BROAD terms, we need to remember that when we are talking to the public, that most of them dont care about some of the things we are really into such as drill, accoutrements, and the depots the clothing came from. I used to present a 45 minute talk that discussed the Western Theatre's depot and arsenal systems, and it did terribly as far as giving the public anything meaningful. Should we address these items? Yes, but not in depth unless asked. We should go through the clothing and equipage quickly, noting for Confederates that they were generally well supplied unlike the Ragged Rebel myth, but let it end there, unless asked for more.
What we have found to be the most interesting to us and the public is who these men were, where they came from, WHY they enlisted and fought, what combat was like for them and how it effected them, and then what happened to them and their worlds. We can address tactics in there in the combat section and challenge common perceptions on that. But I can tell you we could do these talks for an hour and have huge groups stick with us for the duration and generate good discussion afterwards. This also makes things more interesting for us, no need to go over and over the this is a volley, this is fire by file, this is fire by rank. Those can be done, BUT no need to go in depth, and it makes it different for us. Over the summer we have addressed a number of units and compared and contrasted them, everything from diehards like the 1st TN and the 10th SC, to the second rounders of the 41st ALA and 41st TN, to the conscripts in the 60th NC and 65th GA, yes folks the number of the regiments means a great deal generally as far as the age, social position, motivation, and dedicationl. We have also addressed Union soldiers like the strong abolitionist regiments like the 8th Kansas and the 105th OVI, to the Democrats of the 15th KY. Anyway, good topic.

Lee

[Emmanuel Dabney]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

And I'm going to jump back on here to say something I forgot to say earlier and somewhat ties into what Lee was saying...

At the Chickamauga event (which didn't apply to me) but the Co. H guys demonstrated to the public tactics that they don't recognize much, in that case firing from the ground, loading on their backs.

I sometimes engage visitors on my tours at Petersburg NB on this when I line them up in a traditional shoulder to shoulder format and simply roll a kickball towards their feet and have them imagine it were a cannon ball belching out a cannon behind a well fortified position as they cross over a half-mile of open and treacherous ground. Then I have them spread out in a skirmish line and roll the ball again and there are of course fewer casualties. I'm not advocating bringing kick balls to events but the public does GET tactics if you make them clear and interesting. People generally know how guns work, but getting more people to care will be a matter of addressing how people acted and reacted to Civil War weaponry.

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Innovative Interpretation for the PUBLIC

A theme in a couple of these posts that is interesting is challenging commonly-held misconceptions, whether "moonlight and magnolias" or tactics. One line I hear all the time from my non-reenactor friends is, "Why did those guys fight in lines like that?" (Well, in truth, they rarely did fight in lines "like that". But, that's what the public sees on the big screen, small screen, and at reenactments)

To Lee's point, I think another way to engage the public is to talk about the men themselves. Who were they? Why did they fight? I think the compare/contrast among regiments is a great idea!

More years ago than I'd like to admit...
John Stillwagon did a great job as "MC" for an LH event at Gaines Mill. Our company of Texans came charging out of the woods toward the public. Having grabbed their attention, we were halted and John explained how what they had just seen was only a small section of the charge that day. I thought it was a great attention getter and a great way to help them grasp the scale of the battle.

Thanks, Lee and Emmanuel for posting here. Its great to hear from the pros!